DCist: Univ. of Maryland President Supports Lower Drinking Age

Chestrockwell

Mon, 01 Sep 2008 09:13:04 -0500

On a side note if you are thirsty you should get a $2.50 32 ounce beer and a 3 dollar plate of wings at Recessions today. Place is awesome http://www.sansconnie.com/2008/08/26/monday-king-kong-happy-hour-recessions-lounge/ BUT - I agree go with the lower age it will teach them responsibility instead of chugging cognac in their parents bathroom:

pants

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:02:22 -0500

I'm getting thirsty reading this too. Makes me want to crack open a beer when I get home. I think that college kids will drink beer regardless of what the legal age is, so I think colleges are tired of having to pay campus cops to bust parties and enforce drinking bans only to put a black mark on a kid's record that might follow them into their professional lives. That's counter-productive to the whole point of giving them a degree. As to the argument that drinking openly at 18 or 19 makes for better habits with alcohol, I can see that. After a while the novelty wears off and its just beer....tasty tasty beer.....

OctoberOrange

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 16:13:48 -0500

I don't think anyone is arguing that students who drink heavily will stop doing so if the drinking age is lowered, but will it encourage students to make more responsible choices when it really matters? Colleges run into problems with underage students who are so afraid of being caught themselves that they won't do the right thing and call for help when a fellow student has had too much to drink and needs medical attention. It's possible that a lower drinking age might alleviate some of this, and allow administrators the chance to actually help those in need - whether that means calling an ambulance or helping a binge drinker find counseling after the fact. College presidents might be signing on for legal and financial reasons, but there's no doubt they're thinking of the safety and/or risks to their student bodies as well.

3MartiniLunch

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:04:03 -0500

While on a Prague-bound night train from Germany during a study abroad a few years ago, there were about 15 German early high school getting wasted on 24oz pilsners from the cafe car carryout window. The professor/chaperone for their field trip saw no issue with this, but it kinda sucked having drunk 15 year olds running around the aisles and pounding beers in the vestibules. When it became clear no one was getting any sleep we joined them and learned they were alot like we were - during our early years of college. The thing is alot of these kids got out their binge drinking in a semi-supervised environment and at an age where they cannot do too much damage to their lives. When a drunk 15 year old does something stupid, over there they say "oh, well hes just a kid". When a drunk 21+yr old does something stupid here, the stakes are alot higher and the legal system a lot less forgiving.

Politburo

Wed, 20 Aug 2008 09:11:20 -0500

They may be arbitrary, but that doesn't make them illegal.

GreenLineCoed

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:31:04 -0500

ironically, while Mote has signed on for this movement, Maryland still lacks good samaritan rules for students living in the dorms who attempt to get help for roommates or friends who get alcohol poisoning.

HCE

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 16:57:52 -0500

Social Security is different because the only way you can generally earn benefits is by paying into it (or having a dead spouse pay into it). After legal adulthood, age-based restrictions are about as arbitrary as race-based restrictions.

AMDCer

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:59:56 -0500

Also just noticed that my alma mater Dickinson is on the list. Woohoo! Go Big Dick!

AMDCer

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:57:56 -0500

Wait a minute - I just noticed that the sign in the photo reads, "you must be 21 to buy non-alcoholic beer". ??????? I don't know why anyone would want to buy NA beer to begin with, but am I missing something?

hillrat

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 15:10:13 -0500

And speaking of buds, that goes double for reefer. Nothing scares a kid straight like sitting in a circle in the den and getting baked with your parents while staring at the back of Pink Floyd albums and dollar bills. That sh!t is cruel, man. I'm planning on subjecting BabyRat to this type of aversion therapy when the time is right. I'll make her get baked with me and the Wife; nothing like watching Mommy turn into a giggling mess and hearing Daddy call you "dude" 50 times an hour to put you off the weed.

Politburo

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:59:10 -0500

Age-based restrictions only have to pass a rational basis test. Under your logic, I could sue and start collecting Social Security and using Medicare. Would you be surprised if that suit won?

HCE

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:49:44 -0500

Politburo, I know how it works. However, since you won't address an argument on its terms and obviously know everything you already think you should know, it's pointless trying to discuss this with you. For others, the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause has been extended to cover all sorts of things since its inception. I would not be surprised if a legal adult brings a suit and wins at some point.

GhostofSuperPanda

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 14:16:49 -0500

I think i witnessed this bizarre phenomenon first hand throughout my time at college. Having attended a university on the border with Quebec (legal drinking age 18) the difference between college students at McGill, Concordia, etc. and my school were striking. First and second year students at the Canadian schools tended to drink in social settings, bars and clubs. While some undoubtedly took it too far, far fewer of my friends at said schools and their friends had issues with overdosing. Binge drinking never struck any of my friends (Canadian born) as being even remotely entertaining. Treating 18-20 year olds like children only further delays their road to becoming a mature and responsible adult. And at no point did i witness a Canadian student binging in a dorm room, while as an resident adviser (for the free room and board) i never went more than about 4 days without an incident involving either binge drinking or mixing large amounts of alcohol and other drugs resulting in hospitalization. Nye sayers would be right to point out that a simple comparison like mine ignores a multitude of factors besides age, but putting aside clear differences in geographic location (small city vs. big city), student demographics, and admissions requirements, the decision to hamper personal growth by limiting 18-20 year olds exposure to social interactions involving alcohol are, in my opinion, a true failing of our society.

Politburo

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:41:03 -0500

"Beer isn't seen as taboo or "off-limits," it is a normal part of everyday life that is meant to be enjoyed responsibly, not pounding beer after beer at the flip-cup table trying to get wasted." I don't see why these are mutually exclusive.

alewis

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:40:06 -0500

I will always support an end to the legal drinking age. I don't really need an argument, do I?

Politburo

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:33:41 -0500

HCE to put it briefly, that's just not how it works. Based on your fallacious argument and past history, I know I'd just be wasting time explaining it.

3jacks2nines

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:27:30 -0500

With a lower drinking age, many kids learn to drink around their parents. The amount of binge drinking at any age isn't going to change unless the culture of drinking changes, whether it's taboo at 18 or 21. Agreed. My first experiences with alcohol were in a casual, supportive, family environment studying abroad in Austria. The drinking culture is completely different. Beer isn't seen as taboo or "off-limits," it is a normal part of everyday life that is meant to be enjoyed responsibly, not pounding beer after beer at the flip-cup table trying to get wasted. In a way, if we shifted the cultural paradigm to accepting and enjoying alcohol responsibly with parental input and guidance, getting trashed would lose its outlaw appeal. But ultimately, if you are an adult legally at 18, then you are responsible enough to make your own alcohol decisions and deal with the consequences.

Spill

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:20:32 -0500

My first thought was that the 14th Amendment equal protection argument doesn't hold up because states are expressly permitted to enact regulations of alcohol sales by the 21st Amendment, which repealed Prohibition. However, a little further digging turned up Craig v. Boren, a Supreme Court case that held, in effect, that the 21st Amendment does not trump the 14th. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=429&page=190

monkeyrotica

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:12:29 -0500

This only addresses a symptom and not the underlying problem. Kids in college get sh!tfaced because they've had to deal with "helicopter parents" since day one, so that they can't even defecate without calling mom to figure out whether they should wipe front-to-back or versa visa. One taste of freedom and of course these clowns are drinking straight Everclear without even a lime Slurpee chaser. Parents should be giving kids wine with dinner while they're still in gradeschool, and, to help remove any residual cachet associated with underaged drinking, the State should mandate that every 13-year-old be forced to down a half-case of Carling's Black Label in one sitting. It's just the sort of aversion-therapy-meets-bar-mitzvah this country needs to nip this problem in the bud. And speaking of buds, that goes double for reefer. Nothing scares a kid straight like sitting in a circle in the den and getting baked with your parents while staring at the back of Pink Floyd albums and dollar bills. That sh!t is cruel, man.

orangeline

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:08:40 -0500

An issue with 18 as the age is that then you have a decent chunk of high school seniors who can legally buy alcohol. Does that exacerbate the problem at the high school level? 16- and 17-year-olds are already bad drivers due to inexperience...if their classmates can obtain beer more easily maybe it makes things worse. I don't know what the answer is. The "forbidden fruit" aspect is certainly one of the draws for college kids...I was amazed at the number of people I knew in college who were upfront about the fact that their primary attraction to drinking was that their parents told them not to do it. Maybe 19 is appropriate.

RJ

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 13:06:44 -0500

I agree with petitepomme, my drinking problems will stop if the bars were filled 18-20 year olds...just imagine what Adams Morgan will turn into then.

HCE

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:57:39 -0500

These schools should file a friendly brief when someone under 21 challenges the legality of the drinking age. In states where the age of majority is 18 (in about half it is 21), the drinking age is a violation of the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. If you are a legal adult, you are entitled to the same treatment under the law. There is significant precedent. Illegal immigrants have been granted certain rights due to the equal protection clause. Surely if the 14th Amendment applies to illegal immigrants, it applies to adult, US citizens.

MahoganyShip

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:57:22 -0500

Let 18-year-old adults drink in a bar like adults and a lot of the problems associated with underage drinking will go away.

petitq

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:45:49 -0500

The amount of binge drinking at any age isn't going to change unless the culture of drinking changes, whether it's taboo at 18 or 21. What about changing the drinking age to 19 and increasing the penalties for DUIs (which I think should happen anyway). And to the argument that if you can die for your country, you should be able to drink in your country... What if I believe that you shouldn't be able to join up until you're 20 or 21. What if I don't believe that you're capable of nor should you be making that kind of decision as soon as you possible can? Well then you'd probably think I'm unpatriotic. Maybe I am.

MtP

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:33:38 -0500

With a lower drinking age, many kids learn to drink around their parents. With a drinking age of 21 kids learn to drink from @ssholes right around their own age. I learned to drink around kids who though it was reasonable to run around a golf course drinking SoCo straight out of a 1.75 liter bottle. How does that make sense? No wonder I'm over 30 and still have trouble deciding if I need a fourth 22 oz. beer at the end of a Tuesday night happy hour.

Fenster1977

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:31:18 -0500

Who cares WHY the universities signed? Exactly. Much like when people say "Well the only reason corporations and people like T. Boone Pickens are going green is because there's money in it." Well okay. As long as they're doing it, who gives a shit why? I'm glad they finally all have some kind of incentive to do it. Being green as a fashion statement is the best thing that could happen to the environmental cause. That's when money gets involved. Not a perfect analogy, I know. But you get the point.

petitepomme

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:26:03 -0500

I don't know how/if lowering the legal drinking age to 18 will curb binge drinking but I do know if 18-21 year olds start showing up at bars...it'll be SO LAME!

IntangibleArts

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:24:59 -0500

christ I'm thirsty all of a sudden.

sophiagrrl

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:24:38 -0500

"Now I just wish they'd also come up with a time machine so I could go back to 18 and actually enjoy the change." I'm fairly agnostic on this - but I've never understood the sentiment expressed above. Why wd you want to go back? Was drinking at 18 somehow different? Is it inherent that being drunk and young is better? And why is it all about being DRUNK? Being drunk is stupid, full stop. Being Drunk and young makes for stupid decisions. Drinking doesn't have to equal drunkeness - and so long as we aggrandize the joys of spending your youth drunk, the age limits will remain irrelavant to the glamour we convey.

8th Street

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:23:38 -0500

At least less kids will end up in the hospital - 18 shots vs. 21 shots on their keg day.

JustJenny

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:19:14 -0500

People actually have trouble getting alcohol in college? I went to school in DC. I never had trouble getting served in bars - although they were the kind of bars 18-year-olds like to hang out at...

clygo

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:16:45 -0500

Bitching about the evil motives of universities? Seriously? Who cares WHY the universities signed? Getting rid of the arbitrary drinking age and being able to redirect the resources used to bust underage drinkers would be ..... a totally RATIONAL thing to do.

Politburo

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:12:56 -0500

"Right, so changing state laws is really not going to effect the drinking culture. Why do it then" Because there is a disparity in the current laws, where you can legally be sent to fight overseas but you cannot legally have a beer. You're against the change because it would benefit universities? That's just weird.

Reid

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:11:25 -0500

I completely agree the drinking age should be lowered (I think 19 is probably the best age). At the very least they should lower the age for "near beer" like it used to be in a lot of states. You'd still have some kids drinking hard liquor or killing themselves in some way, but I think the aggregate drinking would go down. I think the amount of "healthy" drinking would go up. By which I mean, the amount of more casually social drinking would displace some of the more unhealthy binge drinking. Now I just wish they'd also come up with a time machine so I could go back to 18 and actually enjoy the change.

ces12

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:08:35 -0500

It'd be interesting to see the effect that this has on underage DUIs. Part of me wants to believe that part of the reason that minors get so many DUIs is that they have to hide their drinking from their parents/RAs and make the decision to drive rather than wait out their drunkenness. However, with how irresponsible people are in America, I'm sure DUIs would skyrocket. I'm glad to live in an area where I dont even have to think about driving to go out.

Fenster1977

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:05:12 -0500

yup. that's my state for you. it was like that for years. they tried to close the loophole several times but it never took. finally, the feds said either you change the law or we cutoff highway funding. it finally went through. then the La. Supreme Court stepped in and put a hold on the law until they could review. so it went back to 18 for a few months. then they finally ruled it was constitutional. back to 21. i also got my driver's license at 15 :-). but they eventually changed that to 16. we love being different down there. the Napoleonic code is proof of that.

Kev29

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 12:04:08 -0500

And the 21 year old legal drinking society in the US has similar issues. So maybe the legal age has little to do with it? Right, so changing state laws is really not going to effect the drinking culture. Why do it then - so kids who already have a great time in college can, err, still have a great time in college? This whole concept has nothing to do with the health and wellbeing of young drinkers but with the financial and legal interests of colleges and universities. I'd love to support this in principle, but this really has more to do with the self-interest of universities. Think of the good times they could promote and profit from with a legal drinking culture? And the money they'd save in policing and prosecuting students.

suances

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:59:15 -0500

Fenster: you could buy alcohol at 18 but could not drink until 21? That's weird!

Fenster1977

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:53:17 -0500

as someone who went to a school in a state where the drinking age changed from 18 to 21 halfway through my freshman year*, i can say that it definitely had an effect. it was much more of a laid back atmosphere when it was "legal". kids got drunk, sure. but it wasn't a big deal. they changed it and all of sudden alcohol was like crack to some kids. i don't know if it's the right decision to change it. all i know is that for good or bad, the drinking age has some effect. *The drinking age has always been 21 in Louisiana. But before 1996, it was legal to sell to 18 year olds. they finally closed the loophole. the drinking aspect was never enforced, until the SAE pledge died at LSU. then cops were raiding every bar in NOLA.

Politburo

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:50:23 -0500

"Problem is, 18 year old legal drinking societies like the UK still struggle mightily and admittedly with binge drinking issues. " And the 21 year old legal drinking society in the US has similar issues. So maybe the legal age has little to do with it?

Andrew Wiseman

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:49:48 -0500

Agree with freshyill and wonderwazz - GW, for example, has big alcohol poisoning problems. I attribute that (at least partially) because the university cracks down so hard on drinking and doesn't let kids drink at school-sponsored events like concerts, so they're hiding in their rooms.

shamigo

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:47:55 -0500

nope, no DC colleges. Drinking age sucks for us underage folk. Has anyone read the the Washingtonian article on what to do around here if you're under 21? It's SO LAME!

spadeaction

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:47:29 -0500

UNC is not on the list, but Duke is. Poo on you, Erskine Bowles.

fuckregistering

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:47:17 -0500

It should have nothing to do with age ... if you're old enough to give your life to your country, then you should be old enough to drink. If you're responsible enough to attend college, then you should be responsible enough to drink.

Kev29

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:47:16 -0500

Indeed freshyill - but the cultures that don't have a major underage binge drinking culture, also don't have a general binge drinking culture. I'm thinking about countries like Italy, Portugal, etc. But, the US is more akin to countries like the UK, Ireland or Australia where the drinking culture is already ingrained. The genie is out of the bottle and there's no stuffing it back in. What I think a lowered drinking age would do is merely lower the taboo drinking age - like what happens in the UK, where kids just get started slamming alcopops earlier.

wonderwazz

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:46:09 -0500

maybe thats what you meant freshyll, i just reread it

wonderwazz

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:44:57 -0500

drink as much of it as you can right now because you don't know when you'll get it again" I don't think its a matter of "hurry up and drink it now because we might not get to again soon." binge drinkers will be at it again the very next night regardless. i do think it would help alleviate the tendancy of under 21ers to quickly down 14 beers in a pre-drink before going out. maybe students would be able to pace themselves more if it wasn't such a secrecy thing.

Disco Stu

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:43:24 -0500

I totally agree freshyill.

freshyill

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:32:26 -0500

@Kev29 And many also don't. College students are going to party, that's a fact. But if you can remove the "forbidden fruit" aspect of it, you can hopefully also remove the "drink as much of it as you can right now because you don't know when you'll get it again" aspect of it as well.

OldPosterKnownAsCranky

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:30:06 -0500

Doesn't look like any DC colleges have signed on.

Kev29

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:27:10 -0500

I can see why college presidents would want the burden of policing alcohol offenses off their hands again. It would pretty much do away with the in locus parentis role that they've been ignoring anyway in recent years. And this will free them up to do what they're really hired to do, rake more money in for their universities. Problem is, 18 year old legal drinking societies like the UK still struggle mightily and admittedly with binge drinking issues.

RJ

Tue, 19 Aug 2008 11:25:25 -0500

Michael Phelps says 4 years too late.